More bolts at Roadside

Post by **Huggybone** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 5:14 pm

I'm not sure why a bolt chopper would automatically be a schmuck.
If you have a problem with the bolts, go pull them out. I don't see why it is such a big deal.

Post by **TradMike** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 5:57 pm

Here's my two cents. Poorly protected trad routes in the Red translate to your gear being there for looks and probably won't hold a fall. It gives you that extra mental edge but that's all. Sandstone is not that strong when it gets thin and flaky. Cracks are good but a lot of nut placements are suspect in sandstone. I saw someone deck on Rock Wars when he took a fall and a piece of the flake broke off. You may have seen the missing piece of rock. Everyone there was in shock because it looked like a good placement. That person was in way over their head. Now don’t go and bolt Rock Wars! Just know you probably shouldn’t take a long fall on the lower section. Consider making more mixed routes if you are into retro-ing old trad routes. I think that would pacify the majority. Mixed routes are cool in my opinion. Look at the New Rive Gorge. The New has tons of mixed routes. I love trad climbing because the places it can take you but I don’t always want to risk my life because of poor pro. And then again, sometimes it’s fun to get on a heady route and some people thrive on that kind of stuff. I think I might have just talked in circles.

Post by **captain static** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 6:21 pm

Huggyboy, haven't heard from you lately. You must be off school & bored on Good Friday or on Spring Break? Anayway's, are coming to RRG anytime soon?

Back to the subject. Should such questions be resolved by the RRGCC Climbing Advisory Council? Elections for open seats on the CAC are coming up at DerbyFest. I know that the CAC was developed, in part, to review and make recommendations concerning route development on USFS land. But should CAC review also be applied to private land? I have been wondering if the USFS Limits of Acceptable Change process will supplant the CAC review & input? What is your opinion? Should decisions about bolt placement be made by the whims of individual climbers or should it be by organized committee?

Post by **tsparks** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 6:47 pm

If we leave bolt placement decisions up to the CAC, then even the route development on private land will come to a grinding halt. I'm guessing that the people that sit on the CAC don't have to time to review every new route that is going up out there. I think for the most part the bolters/routesetters out there know what they are doing and don't really need input from anyone.

Post by **Wicked Tribe** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 3:08 pm

I always thought of the possibility of bolting it, but had never climbed it so didn't. Might go try it to satisfy my curiosity.

Post by **ynot** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:36 pm

The majority of people bolting are in the coalition.Maybe thats as it should be.
I have seen lots of good places where a bolt or 2 was needed ,but managed,if not safely ,without them.

Post by **The Pirate** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:42 am

Hamsco had the permission of the first assentionist, that is all that needs to be said. If you dont like it , then dont climb it...